Valdemar wrote:Looks like the system is based on their existing inverter SE7600A-USS, which likely means those who already have it can just add missing components, mainly the battery, which doesn't necessarily mean there will be many takers.

The existing inverter is SE7600A-US. The new inverter is SE7600A-USS.

Indeed. No easy upgrades then. Seems like the solution is not designed to provide backup power to whole house, only to some loads that have to be connected to a new separate panel, but you can probably land all your loads there leaving only solar breakers on the main panel ginen you can stay under 5kW load total. Sounds like a $2,000 job just for that extra panel.

1. The battery is connected in parallel with the PV strings. I suppose this is the beauty of the SolarEdge approach of using the optimizers at each PV module. Those DC/DC converters can perform the function of peak power point tracking and still provide whatever battery voltage is required given the operating conditions of the system.

2. Only ONE battery is allowed to be connected. This seems a little odd since Tesla included a DC/DC converter in EACH PowerWall. My conclusion is that those things are meant to be connected in parallel. (Note 4 does say that you should contact SolarEdge if you wish to connect more than one battery.)

3. Maximum continuous power draw from the battery is 3.3 kW. This tells me that they REALLY mean it when they say that you can only connect one battery. Tesla says their batteries are limited to 2 kW output power, so connecting two would mean 4 kW. So if you can only connect one, then you really can only get 2 kW output power. Does this mean that you are limited to 2 kW at nighttime when in standalone mode? If so, most will find they cannot even run the distribution fan in their main air handler. (Forget about running the heat pump, if you have one of those!)

At this point, I'm thinking the addition of the battery provides some utility, but limiting the output power to 2 kW when there is no sunlight is a pretty severe limitation. I really don't understand why they cannot allow higher power operation from the battery alone given the 7600 VA rating of the inverter in this unit.

RegGuheert wrote:Once we have pricing information, we should be able to compare the per-kWh cost of this solution when compared with the $0.13/kWh we get for the Enphase AC Battery (assuming the application for both is time-shifting consumption). Tesla currently lists the PowerWall at $429/kWh, which is about half of Enphase' AC Battery, which comes in at $833/kWh, but PowerWall contains no inverter. The PowerWall solution might be cheaper if more than one PowerWall is attached to the StorEdge inverter.

Also, it appears that development of the Powerwall product continues at a rapid pace:

Green Tech Media wrote:"We've got the Tesla Powerwall and Powerpack, which we have a lot of trials underway right now around the world. We've seen very good results," said Musk during a talk to Tesla car owners in Paris, The Verge reports. "We'll be coming out with version two of the Powerwall probably around July, August this year, which will see [a] further step-change in capabilities."

The demand will evolve over time the result of GF (GigaFactory) economies of scale price reductions in batteries,just as will a very profitable Model 3 be available in 2017, right? How can you question a Musk prediction?

lorenfb wrote:The demand will evolve over time the result of GF (GigaFactory) economies of scale price reductions in batteries,just as will a very profitable Model 3 be available in 2017, right? How can you question a Musk prediction?

As a small scale TSLA investor, I'm happy to see that price. To me it means they have demand that will pay that at the supply they can offer. That's an excellent markup and should make Tesla Energy profitable now. I don't think they're so focused on residential users at this point, perhaps just industrial users that want to shave peak power costs.

sparky wrote:As a small scale TSLA investor, I'm happy to see that price. To me it means they have demand that will pay that at the supply they can offer. That's an excellent markup and should make Tesla Energy profitable now. I don't think they're so focused on residential users at this point, perhaps just industrial users that want to shave peak power costs.

I think a big market for these huge Powerpacks will be utilities looking to load balance, a very high value application. Powerpacks will have to stand up to considerably higher cycling than car batteries (and they use different chemistry than Tesla's car batteries, of course). Perhaps the 100 kWh/200 kWh is the actual load capability and the batteries themselves are considerably larger to manage the cycling demands over many years. I expect that they have a pretty robust warranty as well and that may include periodic replacements. Just guessing though...

sparky wrote:As a small scale TSLA investor, I'm happy to see that price. To me it means they have demand that will pay that at the supply they can offer. That's an excellent markup and should make Tesla Energy profitable now. I don't think they're so focused on residential users at this point, perhaps just industrial users that want to shave peak power costs.

I think a big market for these huge Powerpacks will be utilities looking to load balance, a very high value application. Powerpacks will have to stand up to considerably higher cycling than car batteries (and they use different chemistry than Tesla's car batteries, of course). Perhaps the 100 kWh/200 kWh is the actual load capability and the batteries themselves are considerably larger to manage the cycling demands over many years. I expect that they have a pretty robust warranty as well and that may include periodic replacements. Just guessing though...